Pope Benedict XVI

Stats

Name: Joseph Alois Ratzinger
Known Aliases: Pope Benedict XVI, God’s Rottweiler, The Enforcer
Occupation: Pope, head of the Roman Catholic Church

Muckmaking History

To be fair, no matter who the Pope was at the time of this writing, he’d be getting ripped apart right now, considering this site is hardly a fan of the Catholic Church and its obsession with carrying on a long, rich history of corruption, hypocrisy, and mental oppression. But this guy just does it so damn well, that it just comes so much easier in this case. In fact, he’s so old school that I almost mistook his philosophies (and I use the term loosely) for those of his 11th century predecessors. But before I get into his outrageous beliefs, I should first cover some down-to-earth, good old fashioned history.

Joseph Alois Ratzinger was born on April 16, 1927 (Holy Saturday) in Bavaria, Germany, and was baptized the same day. Also considering his brother was interested in the priesthood, it looked like a lot of factors would point him in only one direction. He showed interest in being a cardinal at an early age, but joined the next best organization he could find – the Nazi youth. Now I’ll be fair and also state that membership was required by law during that time, but he and his family did not dissent in any way, as only a small minority did. According to the Catholic Church today, both he and his father were bitter enemies of Nazism and did not attend meetings or kill anyone for the Nazi cause, but this is also coming from an organization that to this day denies much of its involvement with Hitler and the German government despite overwhelming evidence, so I can’t say that I’m entirely convinced here, but we’ll move on for proven facts’ sake. Joseph served his time in the army, mostly as a guard, and spent a few weeks as a POW. After his release, he and his brother entered a Catholic seminary. They were ordained in 1951, and by 1958, he was a full professor.

Ratzinger taught at several German universities over the next twenty years or so. He studied under numerous modernist thinkers, and while most of the student body also moved towards more modern, radical thinking, he remained staunch in his traditional views while still calling himself a reformist. Maybe a few of his ideas asked for slight changes in the Church, but nothing that was going to shake anybody up. He published a few books and formed a theological newsletter called Communio by 1972, and by 1977, he was appointed archbishop and then cardinal within months of each other. Towards the end of 1981, Pope John Paul II took a liking to Cardinal Ratzinger and made him Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. That’s where things got interesting.

His post at the CDF was strikingly similar.

The CDF was the renamed Congregation of the Holy Office, or home of the Roman Inquisition, famously responsible for the unjustified persecution of “heretics.” The name change did not alter the attitude of this office, where the Cardinal led a crusade against any kind of tolerant thinking, condemning other religions and philosophies, homosexuality, women’s rights, and even fellow Christians who didn’t fit the Church’s outdated doctrines. In 1999, they released a document entitled “Dominus Jesus,” which warned non-Catholics of their “gravely deficient situation” concerning salvation, and if that wasn’t clear enough, they declared Catholicism the only “instrument for the salvation of all humanity” in “Dominus Iesus” in 2000. (Shit, even the language is outmoded.) Liberation theologians, for example, were censored or suspended because they (gasp!) wanted to help the poor. And by helping the poor, they don’t mean spending millions of dollars on gold-trimmed robes, funny hats, and plane trips to other countries where they guilt middle and lower class citizens into giving money they don’t have; instead, they encourage the poor to stand up for themselves against greedy, oppressive governments (particularly in Latin America) in the same way Jesus stood up to the elite of his time. This was too “Marxist” for Ratzinger’s liking, but I think I’d rather be called a commie than a pedophile protector.

On May 18, 2001, he sent a carefully-worded letter to every bishop in the Catholic Church which detailed the strict penalties, including excommunication, that would be imposed on those who exposed confidential details involving their investigations into sexual crimes committed by men of the cloth. It emphasized the Church’s right to hold these inquiries behind closed doors and reminded them that the statute of limitations on these crimes was extended to ten years. With minors, this statute would begin the day when he or she would turn eighteen. This detail implied quite a bit without exactly coming out and saying it. The letter claimed that any allegation of sexual abuse should be kept a “pontifical secret” and was in the CDF’s jurisdiction to examine, not within the particular diocese in which it happened, despite the fact that they would obviously know a bit more about such local cases than a bunch of uninvolved geezers based all the way back in Rome. This emphasis on secrecy and working just outside the law (The letter never discourages victims from going to the police, but does threaten the clergy for aiding any outside criminal investigation.) did not go unnoticed by many victims and their lawyers, who saw this as an obstruction of justice, which it clearly is. Instead of attempting a feeble explanation as to why they would clearly take the side of rapists over victimized children, a spokeswoman at the Vatican simply replied, “This is not a public document, so we would not talk about it,” which is a very mature way to handle an undeniably grave situation. The Catholic Church would spend millions of dollars in the next few years on sexual abuse cases, with much of the money going to either defend the unmistakably guilty or pay off victims who were telling their stories to the press. Ratzinger’s retort, in all his Jesus-like humility, to the bad publicity was his claim that, “less than one percent of priests are guilty of acts of this type,” which clearly makes said acts perfectly alright in the first place. He did not comment on why the Church, unlike any other employer that I’m aware of, spent so much money defending pedophiles that could have gone to feeding the poor or other charitable acts, and he made no mention of why these men were recommended by high-ranking officials to be moved to other churches instead of turned in to the proper authorities, including Cardinal Law of Boston, a serial rapist facing felony charges who was transferred to Rome under Ratzinger’s authority. I also was not aware that being named a Prefect automatically gave you a degree in Criminal Justice or a badge of any kind, but he seemed quite comfortable with leaving it at that.

Undoubtedly, this ability to staunchly hold onto strict traditions while protecting their own corrupted agendas earned him the nickname “God’s Rottweiler,” which fittingly has origins in his position as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. As I said before, this was formerly The Holy Office of the Inquisition, which began in 1208. Pope Innocent III began a crusade against the Cathars, a “renegade” sect of Christianity, and thousands were slaughtered despite age or sex. Pope Gregory IX continued the Inquisition during his reign, and named Dominic, of the Dominicans, one of its leaders who would act in his name. He and his order merited the Latin name “Domini Cannes,” or “God’s Dogs,” because of their voracious hunting of heretics. Of course, today, the Church doesn’t exactly have hit men at their disposal like they used to, but they do have very shrewd political sway that gets the job done in a more civilized way. In June of 2004, Ratzinger sent a letter to fellow cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, head of an Episcopal task force on Catholic politicians, to be distributed to United States bishops across the country. In it, he warned that the sacrament of communion must be denied to any Catholic politician who stood for abortion or euthanasia, and while he never came right out and named John Kerry, he was the only Catholic running for president who was pro-choice, so it was pretty obvious who he was referring to. What he noted clearly, on the other hand, was that any Catholic who knowingly voted for a pro-choice candidate would be committing a sin. Knowing this would probably create some backlash, as many of his other letters did, so he was quick to include that if they voted for him for other reasons, then “it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.” But basically, the message was pretty clear – vote for Bush or go to hell. While Joseph was not a supporter of the War in Iraq, he supported the war on women with greater enthusiasm. This was probably why, in the following months, Bush successfully nabbed a good portion of the Christian vote, because, with careful wording, Ratzinger made it the job of every cardinal, bishop, and priest to insert a little politics into their homilies. God’s Rottweiler, indeed.

Eeeexcelleeent.

By 2005, it was clear that Pope John Paul II was in poor health, and rumors started going around about who would replace him. These rumors included reports of African and Latin American candidates, considering Latin Americans make up almost half the world’s Catholics, but when taking into account the Church’s history, it should have been obvious that the next pope would be just another pious white guy, and who was more pious and white than Cardinal Ratzinger? John Paul was known to favor the man, and his conservative ideals made him stand out from many of the more “liberal” candidates for the job, receiving other monikers during his dominion such as “The Enforcer” and “The Panzer Cardinal,” named after an armored division of the German army. And these were names that his friends and allies gave him! Despite submitting his resignation three times, citing health issues, Joseph was refused each time and stayed on as Prefect in compliance with the Pope’s wishes. On April 2, John Paul went to meet the maker he talked so much about, and it was abundantly apparent who he would have chosen to take his place. By April 19, the Papal conclave, comprised completely of men appointed by John Paul except for two members, unpredictably (cough) elected Ratzinger. He renamed himself Benedict XVI after Benedict XV, known for promoting peace during World War I. Ironically, this Benedict was about to declare war.

The new Pope began churning out more of his love letters to his opponents, giving speeches across the world condemning birth control/condoms (even to combat the spread of AIDS in Africa), abortion, feminists, and especially homosexuals, who, according to a guy who has more colorful outfits and accessories than any gay man I know, are subject “to intrinsic moral evil” and warned that their rights can and should be “legitimately limited.” The Pope has been given many official titles over the years (I prefer “The Man in the Funny Hat”), but there was one he was not quite happy with. He made it a point to strike “Patriarch of the West” from the list, which may have had something to do with this little thing he liked to call “the dictatorship of relativism,” a common theme in many of his writings and sermons. Like a senile old man screaming from his front porch, he proclaimed that all this modern Western thought about rights and freedoms for everyone, despite gender, sexual affiliation, or religion/lack-thereof would lead to nothing but damnation, terrorism, and even totalitarianism, the latter of which is a complete paradox, considering all he was advocating was the limiting of civil liberties. As he stirred the pot more and more, his essays and publications came under further public scrutiny. People began to realize that this guy had a much more ferocious attitude than John Paul, and was certainly not as morally flexible.

The most notable controversy occurred on September 12, 2006 when Benedict lectured at the University of Regensburg in Germany. Serving there previously as a professor of theology, he was discussing the relationship of faith and reason, the latter of which he lacked when discussing differences in Christian and Islamic ideology. During the speech, he quoted a writing from 14th century Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaiologos, which stated, “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only bad and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” As was his style, he went on to say that this was not exactly how he felt himself, but then backed up this statement by describing Christianity as founded in divine reason, while Islam was a religion believing god to be beyond all human understanding of reason. His main point during this part of the lecture was that Islam found some philosophical loophole to force people to convert, whereas Christianity has always relied on reason to convince people of their righteousness, which I’m surprised he forced out without laughing. Being an educated scholar of theology, he should know better than most the atrocities carried out in the name of the Christian god throughout the centuries. While it is evident that he is right about Islam’s violent convictions, and they should be criticized, just a year before, Benedict was head of the office responsible for the Inquisition, and here he is scolding Islam for spreading faith by the sword. If he had simply admitted that both sides have made their share of mistakes, the Muslim community may have taken it a bit more lightly, but instead it caused protests and riots across the Middle East and condemnation across the world. While many Christians defended the Pope’s words, saying he was simply trying to start a much-needed dialogue between religions, it is obvious that if you think a religion is forcing people to act out violently, you may not want to start a discussion by pointing out their flaws. In characteristic reactionary fashion, two gunmen murdered a 65-year-old nun volunteering at a children’s hospital in Somalia, a priest was kidnapped and another was beheaded in Iraq, and Christian churches were burned down, vandalized, and protested throughout Iraq in response. Obviously, all of this violence just validated his every supposed “misconception” they were rallying against, but what did he honestly expect? He was never exactly known for his sensitivity in handling delicate topics, and here it finally bit him in the ass. (Well, not him exactly, just other Christians who aren’t protected by bulletproof glass wherever they go.) He was forced to apologize, but it did little good as tensions between the two hypocritical religions have only increased since then, and continue to on a daily basis.

And you thought his Nazi uniform was sexy.

Instead of putting down his dukes and promoting all that peace and love horseshit that hippy Jesus would have done, he continued to pick fights where there weren’t any over the next several years. Benedict pissed off the Jewish community by meeting with a Polish priest who happened to be an anti-semite, refused a meeting with the Dalai Lama because he’s not a fan of Chinese Catholics, and insulted Brazilians by telling them that Christian colonizers were right to force their religion upon them (often through force) because they were “silently longing” for it all along. His long war with feminists and women in general also continued, as he clarified many times in his writing and speeches that a woman’s place was in the home, making babies, cooking dinner, and staying silent as her rights are taken away. There is no room for misinterpretation here – he has accused women of “blurring the biological difference between man and woman,” which is funny coming from a guy who denies any advancements in understanding biology, and just as the Church was finally considering letting women be ordained as priests, he threatened to excommunicate anyone who attempted this blasphemous act. He even started pushing the Latin-only version of the mass, lifting restrictions on performing the old ritual which is only used today by a small number of Christian sects. This mass includes a Good Friday prayer for the conversion of the Jews, which is one of many reasons it was abandoned for a mass that could actually be understood by someone besides the clergy. If that doesn’t prove he is a conservative traditionalist nutbag, I don’t know what could.

The only time the Pope seemed to stray from offending someone was when he visited the United States in April of 2008. The five days surprisingly went by without incident, and in another shocking move, he agreed to meet with sexual abuse victims from the infamous Boston diocese and pray with them, which I guess is the least he could do after aiding their rapists just a few years before. As with most of his visits, this trip was simply one big photo opportunity, and while he did a lot of talking about “healing the wounds” caused by these sex crimes in America, he didn’t speak of passing any new regulations or excommunicating any perverts – he saves the excommunicating for all those bitches who don’t know their place. Even more so than his last few predecessors, Benedict has used his papacy to solidify the Catholic Church’s place as one of the most oppressive and hypocritical religious regimes in the world instead of accepting the contemporary world’s advances and letting the definition of what it means to be Christian grow and prosper into a peaceful acceptance of modernity.

Final Analysis

Pope Benedict is like the George W. Bush of the papacy – steadfastly conservative despite the presentation of any simple facts or contradicting philosophies. He will never see the irony of his own beliefs: that if Jesus Christ actually existed, he would wholeheartedly disagree with his close-minded attitude towards anyone who does not concur with his outrageous viewpoints to the letter. And he is a muckmaker because he gives fuel to every conformist tool around the world through his hate-filled rhetoric, which they’ll use to goose-step all over any non-Catholic while feeling righteous about doing so. His followers have spent a good amount of time dispelling rumors that he was a Nazi, but he seems to fit the bill even more now than when he wore the uniform and saluted obediently.

The great part about being the Pope is that no matter how many rapists you support or women you spit on, people will constantly defend you out of pure tradition. Much like the people who believe that patriotism requires nothing more than flag waving and head bobbing, Catholics will always treat questioning the Pope like questioning their god – no matter how mysterious (re: ridiculous) his ways may seem, he cannot be wrong because…well…he’s got an obsolete title. The royal family costs United Kingdom taxpayers about 37 million pounds every year, yet their elected government is the one that makes all their real decisions. Why do they continue to support an outdated form of ruling class that currently serves as nothing more than an overblown tourist attraction? Tradition, and because of this impractical ritual, they will continue to do more harm than good for their country and the world. The same can be said of the papacy and the Vatican. The Pope used to control armies and dominate countries, but presently, his role is reduced to living lavishly, dressing absurdly, and speaking viciously. In a world where people are much less frequently burned at the stake and science has given us a more logical set of answers, it seems that his time should have come quite a while ago, but even Catholics who only visit a church every Christmas and Easter will come out in droves just to catch a glimpse of the Pope in his little bulletproof bubble. And that is what Benedict will always be in – a bubble where nothing will harm his precious worldview or influence a thought that may apply to real-world situations and not just sound good in his theology essays.

The presence of a Pope will always make the world just a little more fucked up than it needs to be, as history will effortlessly tell you, but Joseph Ratzinger is a scumbag above the rest. Any reservation you may have had about joining or participating in the Catholic Church can be summed up with this man’s legacy, and he’s only going to bring the Church to even greater lows until he finally sheds his wrinkly mortal coil, which, by the look of things, should be any day now. I just hope he suffers long and hard beforehand, because then maybe, just maybe, he’ll feel a tiny fraction of the pain he’s caused the world during his “ministry.” Perhaps, in that way, he’ll be like Jesus after all.